Parents, researchers tell us, are less likely to get the cold or the flu than non-parents. And not just a smidge less likely. 52 whopping percent.
That doesn't jibe with your reality either, huh? The one where you started sneezing when your oldest started preschool, and haven't put down the Kleenex since. The one where you drag yourself to work regularly with a fever because you used all your sick days taking care of the child whose germs you are now battling?
I was still coughing from the remnants of the latest bronchial storm to hit my house when I called Sheldon Cohen, the Carnegie Mellon psychoneuroimmunologist whose findings are to appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Psychosomatic Medicine, to explain that he must have miscalculated somewhere. (That link is to the journal. The article itself is not yet online.)
Do you HAVE children, I asked him.
No, he answered, and I felt smug.
"We didn't expect these results either," he said, then began to define his terms.
His conclusion, he said, is not that parents are sick less often than non-parents. That, he agreed, would be ridiculous. (I felt a little better. Or, at least, a little vindicated.)
What he found was that when exposed to the same virus, parents are 52 percent less likely to become ill from that exposure, meaning they are more likely to fight off the infection. He knows this because over the past decade or so he and his collaborators have exposed nearly 800 people to the virus that causes the common cold. The subjects were quarantined and observed to see who became sick.
The research started with two opposite theories, he says. First, that parents "have more stressors in their lives and there's lots of evidence" that stress negatively affects the immune system. That would lead one to believe that parents would be more susceptible to germs.
On the other hand, he said, there "are positive psychological affects of parenting -- a sense of purpose, it grows your social network, and we know that those things promote health."
The results would support the conclusion that the psychological benefits trump the stressors when it comes to battling back a cold, he said, adding "just think how much MORE often parents would get sick than they already do" without this immunological boost.
I coughed a few times and asked whether this germ fighting power was equal among all parents, or were some more armored by their "sense of purpose" than others?
It seemed to have little effect on the youngest of parents, he said, defined as those between the ages of 18 and 23, and he theorized that "this reflects the added stressors on young parents -- the economic stresses are greater, they don't have as much of a support network." On the other hand, he said, there is a far greater immunologic effect on parents whose children are no longer living at home -- who have the satisfactions of having children, but not the daily juggle. That group of parents, he said, is 73 percent less likely than non-parents to become ill after exposure to germs.
In other words, the best way to fight a cold is to have children and wait for them to move out.
And then I thought of the 800 research subjects who agreed to be quarantined for six days with the possibility of getting a cold. Who ARE they? I wondered. How did you find parents who could lock themselves away from their children for a week in exchange for what Cohen said is the going rate of $600-$1000?
Could it be, I theorized, that they were parents so exhausted that the idea of a lab-induced virus sounded like a vacation? And could the boost in their immune system come from the fact that the lab accommodations allowed for a full night's sleep? Perhaps if the studies could somehow be conducted at home, in the far from controlled environment most of us live in, researchers might find that parents are walking petri-dishes, converting from exposed to symptomatic almost constantly. Which is, of course, the way it feels.
Now those would be results that would make me feel better.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.